Greek Mythology Predestination and Free

Greek Mythology

Predestination and free Will in Greek Mythology

Designed to provide answers to the difficult questions members of Greek society had to deal with, Greek mythology often considered the debate between predestination and free will. Often, a mythical character's immoral actions would lead to a cleverly derived punishment by the gods, suggesting that free will elicited consequences. Instances such as this include the punishments of Icarus, Narcissus, and Baucis and Philemon all show how a person's actions can lead to his or her demise. In each of these stories, a person is either rewarded or punished because of his or her own actions ("Greek Mythology," 2008, paras. 30-31). The issue of fate in Greek Mythology is perhaps most directly considered through the existence of the three fates, the Moiari, of the women who hold the destiny of all mankind in their hands. Of the stories that consider fate, however, none is more prominent than the Oedipus trilogy. By recounting the story of a king who tries to escape his fate only to find out he cannot do this, Sophocles pushes the Greeks to consider many of the deeper questions in life, such as the purpose of humanity. A closer look at fate by examining both the characteristic three fates and the story of Oedipus reveals that Greeks did not have an assumption of free will, like that which is so prevalent in the 21st century.

Called the Moirai, a name that means parts, the three fates assigned each person his or her "share in the scheme of things" (Atsma, 2008, para. 1). Lead by Zeus, whom Atsma (2008) describes as the "god of fate," the three goddesses used a string to show the life of a man or woman. According to Saunders and A (2006), all the good and evil a person did in his or her life was woven into the string to determine his or her fate (para. 3). The goddesses of fate were ugly, old, and knew the future, as well as frequently pictured with signs of "dominion" (Atsma, 2008, para. 4). Each holding specific jobs -- spinning, measuring, and cutting that thread -- the goddesses determined the consequences of mens' actions. However, Astma (2008) points out that the fates did not necessarily direct a person's life. Instead, they determined the consequences of the actions that people freely undertook. Furthermore, while Zeus could always save someone from receiving his or her fate, the fates were also open to persuasion by humans and other goddesses. In the end, however, it was the fates decision to determine the consequences of a man's actions and other major events in his life, such as when he would die. Thus, the idea of the Morai combined predestination and free will to suggest that a person could choose the actions he or she would take, but was predestined to face the consequences of those choices.

In the Oedipus trilogy, however, this view is questioned. Although Oedipus does suffer from a character flaw -- pride -- and he does kill his father and sleep with his mother, he does not know who they are when he does so. In addition, both events can be explained as rational. Oedipus kills his father, King Laius, when he does not know his identity after an altercation at an intersection. Jocusta, Laius's former wife, becomes his wife after the event. Although Oedipus is not a perfect human being, it can be argued that his treatment was unfair, as he did not make a conscious choice to kill his mother and father. Indeed, Stephandies (2009) points out that "the destiny of Oedipus was fixed before he came into the world," citing a family curse for Oedipus's trouble. This poses another problem for the question of fate, as Oedipus did not seem to determine his actions, but his family did. In addition, the gods also played a large part in Oedipus's fate, allowing curses to go forth.